The TRASHING of the Guard!

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

Thomas RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 2/17/2004 8:08:36 AM

With a formation like the National Guard you are basically looking at a volunteer force. Volunteers are different, either they don't care and want a nice weekend of from the inlaws or they are enthusiastic. The results differ widely. this means that there is no such thing as a standard National Guard unit. Their quality is more spread out than a regular unit. this means, whatever you say about the National Guard, then it is true - of some unit. There is one type of Force that through experience good and bad can really only be performed by part time volunteers: Aircraft spotting and reporting - and I don't quite know why.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 2/29/2004 4:53:17 PM

>>After over 20 years of service I am sick to death of how the regular army treats the AMERICAN soldiers of the Army National Guard as TRASH!!!<< I'd guess there are two theories at work here: First, there is a conspiracy against the National Guard on the part of the Regular Army. Other posts have touched on this -- "they fear us, because if Congress knew how good we were, they'd reduce the size of the active component," etc. I don't know anything about the people posting these sorts of thoughts here, but when I've encountered this argument in the real world, it is usually coming out of the mouth of a 'Guard officer or NCO whose % body fat far exceeds his competence as a leader or commander. Usually, the opinion is offered with a beer in hand, sometimes with hotwings, a hamburger, or something similar in the other. You don't tend to hear it at the gym or out on the track. The other theory is that the 'Guard, especially the combat units, can't do the job safely or reliably. Sadly, having nearly eleven years in the National Guard, I'm of the second opinion. There are some excellent soldiers, NCOs, and officers in the National Guard, but there are also plenty of guys whom I would not trust to guard the doughnut display at a Walmart Supercenter, much less serve beside me on a battlefield. My personal favorite anecdote in this respect being a PT test I took when mobilized back in '02. So there I am in the lane to do push-ups with a First Sergeant in the lane next to mine. This guy is the senior NCO for a tank company -- should be up there in front of the troops setting and enforcing the standard, etc. Plus he's AGR, so it's not like his 60 hour a week job at the factory or office interferes with getting out to do some PT. The graders say 'go,' we start knocking out push ups, and the First Sergeant next to me gets just about immediately told to stop and get up. Turns out that he cannot break the plane and do a push up to standard without his gut resting on the ground. Don't even ask about how sit ups or the two mile run went for this winner. With guys like this in the force -- and, in fact, in key leadership positions within the force -- who has any right to think we'll get any respect from the active component? My experience with the regular army has been that they tend to know what I said above -- there are some good troops in the guard, but also some horrible ones, and because the 'Guard focuses on maintaining numbers, not quality, it is very hard to reliably get a good unit out of the 'Guard. This, sadly, seems to end up alienating a lot of the good troops -- the bad ones could care less, so long as they get their drill check (or, these days, a full-time check while mobilized for federal or state duty). Some of those very good soldiers I mentioned above will remain in the 'Guard at least until they get their twenty years, but I've seen a lot of guys move on after getting sick to death of the corruption, incompetence, and lack of opportunities for advancement, quality training, etc.

Quote Reply

1 2